What do you think?

America is a surprising case, since it has far more people than Japan, France or the UK, but only has one city in the top 3 or 4. How about LA?

Or HK, Seoul, Osaka etc. What for instance makes Paris more important than HK or Shanghai?

Is any other city at the same overall level as NY, London, Tokyo, Paris?
In terms of overall importance - no.

If we are to believe the natives of NYC, London, Paris, and Tokyo- no.

We've had this discussion again and again and again on here. These cities are firmly established as the "Big Four" and there's really no point in trying to suggest that any other city can match them for overall importance.

Yeah, look at the discussion. The people that are against any city joining the "club" are the ones already inside. It's like they are oblivious to the chance that any city can rival them, past, present, or future.

Basically what happened in those topics was that someone might ask a legitimate question or ask for examples of something and then someone would post data, news articles, or pictures. Then the person defending the city would say, "HA- that's no match for _____ is Paris/Tokyo/London/New York." Then someone else would ask for something else, and someone would provide examples for that as well, only to be ridiculed. Then another person would bring the discussion back to step 1 and ask the same damn questions, as if their strategy was to wear people down. That's what half the posts are in the topic- garbage to aggravate people. "Paris and London get along dandy and so they'll never become unimportant. You people are so stupid."

And then people would post incorrect information or statistics on their city just to gloat. It's a waste of time- the people that believe their city is on the same level are fighting an uphill battle against mostly people who are unwilling to compromise and just post the same message of "well that doesn't beat XXXX and NYC overshadows it" and don't tell how NYC (or any other city) overshadows it. You know, if we were seeing what beats what then we'd have only the Big One, not the Big Four, as all four can't be better than each other and share the stage by your logic.

LA!!! :)

Realizing it's a beautiful and vibrant city, I have to ask...why is Paris so important?

Why is Hongkong not forming Big Five with the Big Four?

Realizing it's a beautiful and vibrant city, I have to ask...why is Paris so important?

I remember when it was the big 3...the Tri-world cities or whatever they were called...London, New York and Tokyo

some of you children must be bored shitless.....

my goodness. :stupid:

What do you think?

America is a surprising case, since it has far more people than Japan, France or the UK, but only has one city in the top 3 or 4. How about LA?

Or HK, Seoul, Osaka etc. What for instance makes Paris more important than HK or Shanghai?

i got a better question , which of these "top cities" is the bigest,most influental, most bad-ass city of em all !! now thats a compatition!

either HK is included(and probably Chicago too, America is too powerful) or Paris is out.

come on let's face it, Paris is beautiful, but how is important economically, politically? it's very important culturally though.

There are as many discussions about the Top 3 (NY, London, Tokyo) as there are about the Top 4 (NY, London, Tokyo, Paris). And many about the Top 5 (NY, London, Tokyo, Paris, HK). Anything beyond that is even more speculative and less concrete.

either HK is included(and probably Chicago too, America is too powerful) or Paris is out.

come on let's face it, Paris is beautiful, but how is important economically, politically? it's very important culturally though.

When I read comments like that, I think that many foreigners have a sterotyped vision of Paris. Those who have never been to Paris see this city like a small pretty village with a big Eiffel tower in the middle.
Paris is not that.
Face it, Paris is a huge megapole, it's the most populated urban area of Europe (10 millions of people live in the URBAN area of Paris, not metropolitan). The GDP of Île de France is as big as 2/3 of the GDP of the entire China.
Paris is also important politically : France is one of the five permanent memeber of the UN, France has the atomic bomb, France is one of the most influential country in the EU, etc...
London is more important than Paris only as a financial center.
But Paris is a huge city, it's not only the pretty postal card that you have in mind.

Dam im sick of people thinking paris is a village of 1million people eating baguette and wearing berets. grow up.
its a metro of 11.5 m people and the 2nd financial place in europe and the first business center in europe, with a higher GDP than AUStralia. thanks.(source wikipedia)

^^ I totally agree. In Europe only London can stand up to Paris. It's got the highest GDP of the whole of Europe, population-wise Paris is the biggest or second biggest, depending on how you count it, a lot of International organisations have their hqs in Paris, like the OECD, or UNESCO. It's also the capital city of one of the most influential countries in Europe and the world.
Not to mention its thriving cultural life. Pariscope is published weekly and it's got like 400 pages of cultural events within THAT week. :eek2: I think only London can measure up to this, not even NYC or Tokio.

When I read comments like that, I think that many foreigners have a sterotyped vision of Paris. Those who have never been to Paris see this city like a small pretty village with a big Eiffel tower in the middle.
Paris is not that.
Face it, Paris is a huge megapole, it's the most populated urban area of Europe (10 millions of people live in the URBAN area of Paris, not metropolitan). The GDP of Île de France is as big as 2/3 of the GDP of the entire China.
Paris is also important politically : France is one of the five permanent memeber of the UN, France has the atomic bomb, France is one of the most influential country in the EU, etc...
London is more important than Paris only as a financial center.
But Paris is a huge city, it's not only the pretty postal card that you have in mind.

i admit i have never been to Paris, and id like to visit Paris someday, but i never thought of Paris as a small pretty village with a big Eiffel tower in the middle. Yes it's beautiful, yes it's a thriving metropolis, but that doesnt change the fact London is the most important city in Europe, and Europe is not important economically and politically to have two cities in the top 4, when US and Asia only have one respectively.

i admit i have never been to Paris, and id like to visit Paris someday, but i never thought of Paris as a small pretty village with a big Eiffel tower in the middle. Yes it's beautiful, yes it's a thriving metropolis, but that doesnt change the fact London is the most important city in Europe, and Europe is not important economically and politically to have two cities in the top 4, when US and Asia only have one respectively.

The GDP of entire Asia is smaller than that of EU countries only.

Nominal or PPP?

Dam im sick of people thinking paris is a village of 1million people eating baguette and wearing berets. grow up.
its a metro of 11.5 m people and the 2nd financial place in europe and the first business center in europe, with a higher GDP than AUStralia. thanks.(source wikipedia)

I couldn't agree more. Many Americans have a very ignorant view of Paris. They think of a fairy tale village, with Amelie, lovers, creperies and the like. They don't understand Paris is a huge, diverse metropolis that feels as cosmopolitan and important as New York or London.

Take the RER from CDG to central Paris. That trip alone will change your mind about the city.

The GDP of entire Asia is smaller than that of EU countries only.

so you are saying Europe is more important than United States or Asia (Economy and political influence?)

Purely economically, yes. Politically US is stronger because it's a real country.
Don't forget historical ties are important to.

Yes I think sometimes tourists should see the real Paris, take the RER from Corbeil to Cergy to see its size, and the diversity of its population, visit la defense, chatelet les halles and bastille, visit dormitory ghetto suburbs to realise it also has huge social problems, it is not only a "romantic village, with nice cafes and luxurious french cuisine"

But overhall this thread is useless, there are already two similar threads like this already running

If you're going by GDP, Los Angeles is bigger than Paris. Before the dollar started declining, California at one point even had a bigger GDP than France :)

Los Angeles also has much more influence on global pop culture. Let's not forget what "pop" stands for - popular. Museums are fine, and Paris has among the best in the world. But which do you think has more global reach to more people? Hollywood's film, music and TV industries, or the Lourve and other Paris museums, operas, etc?

Los Angeles also has a larger population (metro), far more immigrants, (most Koreans outside Korea, most Iranians outside Iran, most Filipinos outside the Philipines, most Mexicans outside Mexico, etc).

No one is saying Paris is a small village with 1,000 people smoking and wearing funny hats. Just that it might not be important enough to be in the top three cities of the world. Anyway I sometimes wonder why we care. I personally like Paris (and LA) much more than London. Who cares if London is more important overall? How does that help me as an individual?

Simple answer is no, but I would say Hong Kong comes close.

We've had this discussion again and again and again on here. These cities are firmly established as the "Big Four" and there's really no point in trying to suggest that any other city can match them for overall importance.
Yeah! Italy was, was... was on the same level as the 'Big Four' which made overal a world renound name of, the 'Big Five' - unfortunatly Italy was kiked out coss it gradually fell out of the fours' leag which slowly lead to WW2!

No.

No.

The Principal Agglomerations of the World (2005-01-30)


Name English Name Country Population Remarks
1 Tōkyō Tokyo Japan 34,000,000 incl. Yokohama, Kawasaki
2 Ciudad de México Mexico City Mexico 22,350,000 incl. Nezahualcóyotl, Ecatepec, Naucalpan
3 Seoul (Sŏul) Seoul South Korea 22,050,000 incl. Bucheon, Goyang, Incheon, Seongnam, Suweon
4 New York New York USA 21,800,000 incl. Newark, Paterson
5 São Paulo Sao Paulo Brazil 20,000,000 incl. Guarulhos
6 Mumbai Bombay India 19,400,000 incl. Kalyan, Thane, Ulhasnagar
7 Delhi Delhi India 19,000,000 incl. Faridabad, Ghaziabad
8 Los Angeles Los Angeles USA 17,750,000 incl. Riverside, Anaheim
9 Jakarta Jakarta Indonesia 16,850,000 incl. Bekasi, Bogor, Depok, Tangerang
10 Ōsaka Osaka Japan 16,750,000 incl. Kobe, Kyoto
11 Kolkata Calcutta India 15,350,000 incl. Haora
12 Al-Qāhirah Cairo Egypt 15,250,000 incl. Al-Jizah, Shubra al-Khaymah
13 Manila Manila Philippines 14,550,000 incl. Kalookan, Quezon City
14 Karāchi Karachi Pakistan 13,800,000
15 Moskva Moscow Russia 13,650,000
16 Shanghai Shanghai China 13,400,000
17 Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina 13,350,000 incl. San Justo, La Plata
18 Dhaka Dacca Bangladesh 12,750,000
19 Rio de Janeiro Rio de Janeiro Brazil 12,000,000 incl. Nova Iguaçu, São Gonçalo
20 London London Great Britain and Northern Ireland 11,950,000
21 Tehrān Tehran Iran 11,650,000 incl. Karaj
22 İstanbul Istanbul Turkey 11,250,000
23 Lagos Lagos Nigeria 10,800,000
24 Beijing Beijing China 10,700,000
25 Paris Paris France 9,900,000
26 Chicago Chicago USA 9,700,000
27 Lima Lima Peru 8,350,000
28 Bogotá (Santa Fe de) Bogota Colombia 8,150,000
29 Washington Washington USA 8,050,000 incl. Baltimore
30 Nagoya Nagoya Japan 8,000,000
31 Chongqing Chungking China 7,800,000
32 Krung Thep Bangkok Thailand 7,800,000
33 Chennai Madras India 7,450,000
34 Hong Kong (Xianggang) Hong Kong China 7,300,000 incl. Kowloon

LA has all reasons to be ranged in top 4 in stead of Paris.

Strasbourg of course

I think Hong Kong is close to the big 4, and in the next 15 to 30 years I think Hong Kong will soon be in the same league.

Also i think Paris has much more right to be in than L.A (If any other American city was to join them it would be Chicago) It's the biggest city in Europe, France is one of the most important countries in Europe (definately in the EU) and it has the 5th biggest economy in the world.

Frace is starting to bounce back from it's economic slump, and although Paris may be the weakest contender of the top 4, I think it will be up with the big boys in 10 years.

Not sure what city will make it 'the big 6' after Hong Kong joins the ranks. In the next 50 years it's not impossible that a South American city might rocket up the ranks, they've got the history and culture, they just need the economic importance now.

In the long term (100 years) I think Shanghai, Sydney, Moscow, Singapore, Toronto, and possibly another european city (Germany/Spain/Italy) could vie for position in the 'Big 4/5/6/7/8' Anything can happen, I don't think 100 years ago many people expected Tokyo to become as big or influential as it did.

Yep, maybe Dakar will be one of the world's most powerfull cities in ten years ;), it'd be cool to see the roles reverst

I'm thinking it's like this:


Big 3: New York, London, Tokyo
Big 4: New York, London, Tokyo, Paris
Big 5: New York, London, Tokyo, Paris, Hong Kong

and then rightoutside gnawing at the list and dying to reach the same level are Los Angeles and Shanghai.

I think they make the Big 7


The rest - Sao Paolo, Mexico City, Mumbai, Delhi are just BIG in size, but not so much importance.

Chicago, Toronto, Moscow, Sydney are very large and important cities but are not on the same level as the 7 I mentioned earlier

Btw.. Paris is only 41 square mile compare to LA's 469 SQ Miles... if you were counting population.

But only 33.56 sq. miles in Paris are inhabitatble.

Nominal or PPP?

Nominal.

most Koreans outside Korea

Simply wrong. The place where most Koreans outside Korea is Yanbian Korean Autonomous Province in China.

Simply wrong. The place where most Koreans outside Korea is Yanbian Korean Autonomous Province in China.

In one metropolitan area. Are there any cities in China with 500,000 Koreans? Anyway that region you talked about borders N Korea. Half a million Koreans thousands of miles away in a subtropical multicultural city located in a predominantly caucasian country - that's more interesting.

New York City

Has the world's two largest stock exchanges; NYSE and Nasdaq.


Is the most populated city in the world's richest country.


Has more Fortune(Global) 500 companies than any other city.


Is home to the United Nations


Is regarded as having one of, if not the greatest skylines in the world.


Has higher subway ridership than London, Paris, and Hong Kong.


HQ to the largest number of media organizations; Reuters, Associated Press, Bloomberg, Dow Jones, as well as global media companies: Viacom, Time Warner, Conde Nast, Hearst.


33% of population is foreign born; New York has more Jews than Jerusalem, more Irish than Dublin, more Puerto Ricans than San Juan, more Catholics than Rome, more Jamaicans than Montego Bay, more Guyanese than anywhere outside of Georgetown, more Dominicans than anywhere outside of Santo Domingo, and more Trinidadians than Port-of-Spain and San Fernando combined.


http://pictures.fooguru.org/albums/NYC/wed_08_14_01.sized.jpg

"Is the most populated city"

Actualy this is hard to say, Tokyo is generaly recognised as being the biggest metro area in the world, even more if you count by us standarts

"Is the most populated city"

Actualy this is hard to say, Tokyo is generaly recognised as being the biggest metro area in the world, even more if you count by us standarts

Keep reading after the word "city".

Oups, sorry, had misunderstood what pottebaum said, I apologise

Shanghai is nowhere near the top 7 or 8 cities (yet). HK, Chicago, Frankfurt, Toronto, Sydney and LA are certainly ahead of it.

Btw.. Paris is only 41 square mile compare to LA's 469 SQ Miles... if you were counting population.

But only 33.56 sq. miles in Paris are inhabitatble.

The land area doesn't relate to population, Paris still has a higher population than L.A, despite being a fraction of L.A's size.

Whilst I accept L.A is a fairly important city, it's not as important as Chicago, and no where near Paris.

^ I agree to that. I think Chicago is also more important than L.A.

Metropolitan LA is just a huge collection of suburbs, with a CBD in the center. I know cities with less than a million people that look a lot more urban than LA. The population of an American metropolitan area means nothing. I mean even Washington and Baltimore are considered one met. area!

If my country would calculate like Americans do, my whole country, being the most crowded of Europe, is one huge metropolitan area! :)

Besides, that list is kinda off. Like I mentioned Baltimore and Washington are considered one metropolitan area, while in my country Rotterdam and The Hague are not while those two cities are a lot closer by to eachother!

The land area doesn't relate to population, Paris still has a higher population than L.A, despite being a fraction of L.A's size.
.

The LA metro has 17 million people. It certainly covers a larger area than the Paris metro, but what matters is function. Driving 100 km to and from work is quite common in LA. While in Paris I think very few people would do so. So 100km outside downtown or Westside LA for instance would definitely be integrated into the same metro area, while 100 km outside of central Paris would probably not be. Remember, Americans drive a lot more than Europeans.

When I lived in LA (or NJ) I wouldn't think twice about driving 50 km. I would go drive 50km to get something to eat, and it would take perhaps 30 minutes. Living in NYC, I walk and take the subway for 30 minutes to get Chinese food in Chinatown. The trip is perhaps 10km? (actually I don't know, but anyway not very far).

As for whether LA is suburban or urban - who cares? What does that have to do with a city's importance? Bath, England and Charleston South Carolina are more urban than LA. Does that make them more important?

Politically, Paris is the capital city of a middle-rank power who's politicians like to talk, but unfortunately can't actually influence global events very much. LA is the 2nd largest city in a far more powerful country. Please don't even compare France and the US in importance. There's no equivalence in France getting one global city and America also getting only one.

Osaka, Hong Kong, Seoul, Berlin later Shanghai, Beijing.

It´s better to have more nice and important cities in the world.

Besides economy, what does Osaka have that brings it to such a high level? And Beijing's the capital, but what else? Shanghai's the economic giant in PRC, which still isn't that developed yet. Berlin's the same case with Frankfurt.

"Has more Fortune(Global) 500 companies than any other city."

Not true, it's total Global 500 companies is in the mid 20's, same with London. Tokyo has more than 50.

The GDP of entire Asia is smaller than that of EU countries only.

Are you sure?
China + Japan + India + South Korea + Hong Kong + Taiwan + Southeast Asian coutries + South Asian countries + Middle East...

So all the above contries/regions' (Asia's ) GDP together is smaller than that of EU countries?

within 10 to 15 years, Beijing and Shanghai will play much more important role in the world

How about Russia and most of the former soviet union thats is in Asia

Politically, Paris is the capital city of a middle-rank power who's politicians like to talk, but unfortunately can't actually influence global events very much. LA is the 2nd largest city in a far more powerful country. Please don't even compare France and the US in importance. There's no equivalence in France getting one global city and America also getting only one.

Oh yeah, I think most of us kinda forgot that the US is so much more important than the rest of us. You should get two global cities just because your country rocks!

Go U.S.A.!

^^ I totally agree. In Europe only London can stand up to Paris. It's got the highest GDP of the whole of Europe, population-wise Paris is the biggest or second biggest, depending on how you count it, a lot of International organisations have their hqs in Paris, like the OECD, or UNESCO. It's also the capital city of one of the most influential countries in Europe and the world.
Not to mention its thriving cultural life. Pariscope is published weekly and it's got like 400 pages of cultural events within THAT week. I think only London can measure up to this, not even NYC or Tokio.

??? London is the biggest by far population wise, and has the highest gdp in europe. It also has the most international organisations in europe.

Do your homework, I totally agree with you about Paris it is an economic powerhouse ! It is easily one of the big four, but to say only london stands up to it in europe ?? its the other way round.

The LA metro has 17 million people. It certainly covers a larger area than the Paris metro, but what matters is function. Driving 100 km to and from work is quite common in LA. While in Paris I think very few people would do so. So 100km outside downtown or Westside LA for instance would definitely be integrated into the same metro area, while 100 km outside of central Paris would probably not be. Remember, Americans drive a lot more than Europeans.

When I lived in LA (or NJ) I wouldn't think twice about driving 50 km. I would go drive 50km to get something to eat, and it would take perhaps 30 minutes. Living in NYC, I walk and take the subway for 30 minutes to get Chinese food in Chinatown. The trip is perhaps 10km? (actually I don't know, but anyway not very far).

As for whether LA is suburban or urban - who cares? What does that have to do with a city's importance? Bath, England and Charleston South Carolina are more urban than LA. Does that make them more important?

Politically, Paris is the capital city of a middle-rank power who's politicians like to talk, but unfortunately can't actually influence global events very much. LA is the 2nd largest city in a far more powerful country. Please don't even compare France and the US in importance. There's no equivalence in France getting one global city and America also getting only one.

Is it continous development for that 100km, or is there countryside in between? I sure hope there's countryside in between, 100km of sprawl is nothing to be proud of.

Also I'm sure people do commute into Paris from 100km away, I know certainly in England, people commute to London from Birmingham, Manchester, even from Wales. It doesn't mean that Birmingham and Wales are part of London's Metro does it?

I realy can't comprehend how America works out it's cities population, if I were to include everyone within 100km of my city it's population would jump from 300,000 to nearer 8 or 10 million. Crikey, Wakefield just became one the most important cities in the world, thanks to American population calculations.

I don't think Los Angeles will ever be considered one of the big cities of the world, as oil prices rise, i think Los Angeles will suffer the most out of any city in the world.

I don't think Los Angeles will ever be considered one of the big cities of the world, as oil prices rise, i think Los Angeles will suffer the most out of any city in the world.

Skopie, there could be problems, but LA should be commended for the many things it has done to make itself more centralized and more urbanized. These include:

1. a major rapid transit system that has brough light rail to much of the city as well as subway service from downtown to midcity areas and into the valley.

2. huge investment in the downtown core commercially, residentially, and culturally

3. development of the Wilshire Corridor as a high rise, urbanized linear city

That said, and maybe some Angelenos can answer, there could be some very serious problems if driving becomes more and more impractical. The questions I have:

• Even with downtown and other major cores throughout the city and the LA area, can a sprawling area like LA, with commuting going in innumerable directions, truly be tied together by mas transit?

• How much of an issue is it to have formidable mountains (like the Santa Monicas) right in the city. The Valley is cut off from the City and, in that sense, one can easily see how the secession movement got started.

of course......melbourne and sydney

just multiply melbourne and syndney's pop. 4 or 5 times, and you have 2 way much better cities than n.y or tokio

btw. i think l.a. is way to big, too shallow, too hollywood....if it wasnt for hollywood, l.a. would be just another big city with no identity, i has nothing to offer

l.a., in my opinion is the ugliest, most spread out city in united states, and the ugliest in the world.....nothing special bout it

What a shame, nobody remembered of including the world class Espumoso.

I think HK should be on the same level. It has a high population, 2nd biggest port, and a really good skyline. Why isn't Hong Kong on the same level?

No

Hong Kong is primarily a business city. London and Paris have a lot of cultural institutions that are far better developed than Hong Kong. Naturally New York and Tokyo will be there because they are the key financial centers for the world's 2 largest economies. However, the Kansai region was historically Japan's economic powerhouse. Osaka seems quite under-rated in importance.

Actually, HK is so small with so little population (8 m). And I don't think Paris can compare with the Top 3(NY, London, Tokyo).

^hong kong is 1100sq km,and 7million people,not 8m.....its quite similar with london and new york for its size,

and there are no way of hk ,london,and tokyo for what big3....where is ny and paris....??for cultural,creative,stylish,hk cant compare with real big3....

No
Would you care to explain why instead of posting a no?